I will also note that your post #140 truncated CCC460 without indicating such. There are four quotations in CCC460, you posted two of them, and gave no indication you had omitted the other two.
Do you not see how this is becoming ludicrous?
I didn't post 459 or 461, either. And when asked, I linked to Vatican.va for anyone to read the entire 460.
Apparently the complete sentences I posted from 460 must be interpreted by footnotes and church fathers and other sentences and paragraphs and cannot stand alone under any kind of Biblical scrutiny.
And as anyone can see, the excerpt I gave were quotes from Athanasius and Aquinas so the RCC must have thought they could stand on their own as some kind of factual statements or proofs.
Here's #460 of the RCC catechism (footnote numbers and all)...
"The Word became flesh to make us "partakers of the divine nature":78 "For this is why the Word became man, and the Son of God became the Son of man: so that man, by entering into communion with the Word and thus receiving divine sonship, might become a son of God."79 "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God."80 "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods."81
And when the excerpt from the RCC catechism was offered to Netmilsmom -- "For the Son of God became man so that we might become God." "The only-begotten Son of God, wanting to make us sharers in his divinity, assumed our nature, so that he, made man, might make men gods" -- Netmilsmom responded that those words were a "lie" and that they must have been pulled from some anti-catholic website.
As we've seen, those words are a direct excerpt from the RCC catechism and they were referenced from Vatican.va, as I said, and they could not have come from Vatican.org because that site does not exist.
And they are a "lie."